Literature DB >> 25745090

Impact of time-of-flight PET on quantification errors in MR imaging-based attenuation correction.

Abolfazl Mehranian1, Habib Zaidi2.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Time-of-flight (TOF) PET/MR imaging is an emerging imaging technology with great capabilities offered by TOF to improve image quality and lesion detectability. We assessed, for the first time, the impact of TOF image reconstruction on PET quantification errors induced by MR imaging-based attenuation correction (MRAC) using simulation and clinical PET/CT studies.
METHODS: Standard 4-class attenuation maps were derived by segmentation of CT images of 27 patients undergoing PET/CT examinations into background air, lung, soft-tissue, and fat tissue classes, followed by the assignment of predefined attenuation coefficients to each class. For each patient, 4 PET images were reconstructed: non-TOF and TOF both corrected for attenuation using reference CT-based attenuation correction and the resulting 4-class MRAC maps. The relative errors between non-TOF and TOF MRAC reconstructions were compared with their reference CT-based attenuation correction reconstructions. The bias was locally and globally evaluated using volumes of interest (VOIs) defined on lesions and normal tissues and CT-derived tissue classes containing all voxels in a given tissue, respectively. The impact of TOF on reducing the errors induced by metal-susceptibility and respiratory-phase mismatch artifacts was also evaluated using clinical and simulation studies.
RESULTS: Our results show that TOF PET can remarkably reduce attenuation correction artifacts and quantification errors in the lungs and bone tissues. Using classwise analysis, it was found that the non-TOF MRAC method results in an error of -3.4% ± 11.5% in the lungs and -21.8% ± 2.9% in bones, whereas its TOF counterpart reduced the errors to -2.9% ± 7.1% and -15.3% ± 2.3%, respectively. The VOI-based analysis revealed that the non-TOF and TOF methods resulted in an average overestimation of 7.5% and 3.9% in or near lung lesions (n = 23) and underestimation of less than 5% for soft tissue and in or near bone lesions (n = 91). Simulation results showed that as TOF resolution improves, artifacts and quantification errors are substantially reduced.
CONCLUSION: TOF PET substantially reduces artifacts and improves significantly the quantitative accuracy of standard MRAC methods. Therefore, MRAC should be less of a concern on future TOF PET/MR scanners with improved timing resolution.
© 2015 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PET/MRI; TOF; attenuation correction; quantification; whole-body imaging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25745090     DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.114.148817

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  30 in total

1.  Sensitivity estimation in time-of-flight list-mode positron emission tomography.

Authors:  J L Herraiz; A Sitek
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Improvements in PET Image Quality in Time of Flight (TOF) Simultaneous PET/MRI.

Authors:  Ryogo Minamimoto; Craig Levin; Mehran Jamali; Dawn Holley; Amir Barkhodari; Greg Zaharchuk; Andrei Iagaru
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Attenuation correction in emission tomography using the emission data--A review.

Authors:  Yannick Berker; Yusheng Li
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Zero-Echo-Time and Dixon Deep Pseudo-CT (ZeDD CT): Direct Generation of Pseudo-CT Images for Pelvic PET/MRI Attenuation Correction Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks with Multiparametric MRI.

Authors:  Andrew P Leynes; Jaewon Yang; Florian Wiesinger; Sandeep S Kaushik; Dattesh D Shanbhag; Youngho Seo; Thomas A Hope; Peder E Z Larson
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of sequential PET/MRI using a newly developed mobile PET system for brain imaging.

Authors:  Mizue Suzuki; Yasutaka Fushimi; Tomohisa Okada; Takuya Hinoda; Ryusuke Nakamoto; Yoshiki Arakawa; Nobukatsu Sawamoto; Kaori Togashi; Yuji Nakamoto
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2021-02-28       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  Advances in imaging instrumentation for nuclear cardiology.

Authors:  Jae Sung Lee; Gil Kovalski; Tali Sharir; Dong Soo Lee
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  The Effect of Defective PET Detectors in Clinical Simultaneous [18F]FDG Time-of-Flight PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  Edwin E G W Ter Voert; Gaspar Delso; Felipe de Galiza Barbosa; Martin Huellner; Patrick Veit-Haibach
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 8.  Towards enhanced PET quantification in clinical oncology.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Nicolas Karakatsanis
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  MR Imaging-Guided Attenuation Correction of PET Data in PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  David Izquierdo-Garcia; Ciprian Catana
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2016-01-26

Review 10.  Current Status of Hybrid PET/MRI in Oncologic Imaging.

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Kent Friedman; Hersh Chandarana; Amy Melsaether; Linda Moy; Yu-Shin Ding; Komal Jhaveri; Luis Beltran; Rajan Jain
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.